The decision to limit ice time is common with young defensemen, but given the high level Despres has performed when given the opportunity, it does not make a lot of sense.

I guess if I had a question it would be: what is so special about Derrick Pouliot that he ends up #1 out of the plethora of defensemen the Pens have drafted the past few seasons?

Personally, I think if you factor proximity into it: Despres makes a great case for being #1. But that's immaterial. The most upside in the organization belongs to Pouliot without a doubt. He's just major upside, oozes potential. I know it's fun to complain about him because some other list said that we should have taken someone else or however that goes (it's complete garbage)...but we weren't the only team that ranked him in or around the top 10. He's a great skater, big time vision, really an offensive catalyst. Brian Campbell/Kris Letang territory, he's trying to lean more Letang's way and get a little meaner out there...he's got a lot of tools that he can sharpen for sure. Portland is absolutely stacked in terms of talent, I think they're like 54-12 or something like that...just a dynamo season for them, they've scored twice as many goals as they've given up this year...they've got a good shot to be in the Memorial Cup and Pouliot should have a long playoffs ahead of him where he'll get to show his stuff. Terrific upside with him...just huge.

Interesting about the Portland record...I asked a friend out there whether he had been to any Winterhawks games this year and he said they were "the hot thing" in town (and tickets were harder to get). I guess I know why now.

Yeah, they have ridiculous talent and as long as they don't play it too cool and too cocky, they'll breeze right through to at least the Conference Finals I think. I believe in the first round they're gonna play Seattle and the Thunderbirds will be lucky if they can possess puck for three consecutive seconds...if I was betting on it, I'd take Portland to sweep and the aggregate score to be about 23 to 5 or so...it just shouldn't be remotely in question...

Mikey, which of the forward prospects do you think has the greatest likelihood of making an impact in the NHL? Do you think Agostino returns to Yale for his senior season, or does he sign with he pens?

pens_CT wrote:Mikey, which of the forward prospects do you think has the greatest likelihood of making an impact in the NHL? Do you think Agostino returns to Yale for his senior season, or does he sign with he pens?

I'll assume I can't use Beau Bennett to answer the first question? That's a little cheap I guess.

The question of upside vs. impact has me all but stumped. Blueger and Zlobin have the major upside. Agostino and Archibald have a better chance of making an impact probably. I saw a young Agostino both in HS (though my memory of that is fuzzy) and as a freshman in college...saw some potential in him, but not a massive upside. I've been told he's gotten better recently - I'm not wild about him, but I don't hate him. Archibald I've seen get much better since we've drafted him, becoming a catalyst for offense at school.

Will Agostino come out this year? Uhh...I have no inside info on that, I'll ask around after his season is over (soon) and see if I can get a read. My inclination is no. He's certainly not above and beyond at the collegiate level by any stretch. Merely a very good player. He can work on his skating a little more, he's not technically all that great IIRC...he has a good motor, he gets up and down the ice, but it's not always pretty...he's pretty aggressive though and he has decent hockey sense it looks like, he rarely is mesmerized out there...I'd let him stay another year otherwise he'd be better off starting a year in the ECHL, IMO and our AHL team depth is iffy and I still say that...

Scott Harrington was voted best penalty killer in the Western Conference and, for the second straight year, ran away with voting for best defensive defenseman. No one received more voting points in any of the other categories (20 in all) in either conference for any one category than Harrington received for best defensive defenseman. So it was as close to a consensus choice as you can get basically.

mikey287 wrote:The question of upside vs. impact has me all but stumped. Blueger and Zlobin have the major upside. Agostino and Archibald have a better chance of making an impact probably. I saw a young Agostino both in HS (though my memory of that is fuzzy) and as a freshman in college...saw some potential in him, but not a massive upside. I've been told he's gotten better recently - I'm not wild about him, but I don't hate him. Archibald I've seen get much better since we've drafted him, becoming a catalyst for offense at school

From what I've seen of Agostino, I wouldn't mind if he returned for his senior year. He likes to use his body a lot to protect the puck down low, but he still gets out-muscled by defenders a bit too much for my liking. I think another year of improving strength and balance before going pro would do him good.

Archibald, definitely, I didn't really think much of him his freshman year, but he really turned it on this year. I think he ended up like 5th or 6th in goal scoring, but what I really liked was his tenacity and physical play. He wasn't afraid to mix it up and get under people's skin, and he could surprisingly lay out players way bigger than him, despite his size. Easy to envision him mucking it up while contributing some timely offense on the 3rd line in a few years.

Scott Harrington was voted best penalty killer in the Western Conference and, for the second straight year, ran away with voting for best defensive defenseman. No one received more voting points in any of the other categories (20 in all) in either conference for any one category than Harrington received for best defensive defenseman. So it was as close to a consensus choice as you can get basically.

Didn't Harrington also win smartest player the year before? Odd he wouldn't be on this year's list. Maybe they wanted to spread things out a bit more? He certainly didn't get dumber

Its a very good question. The Pens beat reports don't seem to like to ask Bylsma any tough questions.

As so many on this board and around the Penguins have said a million times, there is no reason to consistently sit Despres like Bylsma has been doing. He has been extremely good this year.

And just as an example, last game against Toronto, Despres played about 18 minutes while Engelland played about 11/12. So during the game Bylsma clearly feels more comfortable sending Despres out there.

IMO, its a case where Bylsma simply does not like scratching vets over rookies.

I still don't get where Despres is being consistently scratched. He's played 20/28 games. He's never been scratched more than two games in a row.

I think the biggest factor is that the D has been pretty healthy. In recent years, this team was seemingly always missing a couple D due to injury at any given time. If that continued this year, Despres would easily be in the lineup every night. Probably playing a more prominent, less protected role too, and people would begin turning on him when they see that a young, inexperienced defenseman makes a lot of mistakes.

I think there's logic to him occasionally being scratched even if you don't agree with it. I'm not an Engelland fan but he does provide something in the way of toughness that Despres can't. Bylsma apparently thinks it's important. So he usually plays. Eaton still has utility as a PK defenseman, which for a team that is pretty bad at killing penalties is worth having in the lineup. There aren't many D on the team I'd put above him on the PK, even that this stage in his career. And they want Bortuzzo in the lineup occasionally as well. When they have generally had eight healthy D, somebody has to sit. Sometimes it's been Despres, most of the time it hasn't. I really don't think they're doing anything egregious with him and I don't think it's a sign that they're down on him.

Ultimately, I think they will restructure the D with a move or two and you'll see Despres as a regular to start the playoffs. He may occasionally be scratched then too if he's not playing well, and there's no shame in that. Letang started at the bottom of the totem pole too and he got healthy scratched in his first playoffs.

mikey287 wrote:The question of upside vs. impact has me all but stumped. Blueger and Zlobin have the major upside. Agostino and Archibald have a better chance of making an impact probably. I saw a young Agostino both in HS (though my memory of that is fuzzy) and as a freshman in college...saw some potential in him, but not a massive upside. I've been told he's gotten better recently - I'm not wild about him, but I don't hate him. Archibald I've seen get much better since we've drafted him, becoming a catalyst for offense at school

From what I've seen of Agostino, I wouldn't mind if he returned for his senior year. He likes to use his body a lot to protect the puck down low, but he still gets out-muscled by defenders a bit too much for my liking. I think another year of improving strength and balance before going pro would do him good.

Archibald, definitely, I didn't really think much of him his freshman year, but he really turned it on this year. I think he ended up like 5th or 6th in goal scoring, but what I really liked was his tenacity and physical play. He wasn't afraid to mix it up and get under people's skin, and he could surprisingly lay out players way bigger than him, despite his size. Easy to envision him mucking it up while contributing some timely offense on the 3rd line in a few years.

Any recent rumblings on Antoine Laganiere and Andrej Sustr?

I agree. And the recent rumblings are: their "family advisors" (cough) are very busy becoming "agents". Lots of interest.

Scott Harrington was voted best penalty killer in the Western Conference and, for the second straight year, ran away with voting for best defensive defenseman. No one received more voting points in any of the other categories (20 in all) in either conference for any one category than Harrington received for best defensive defenseman. So it was as close to a consensus choice as you can get basically.

Didn't Harrington also win smartest player the year before? Odd he wouldn't be on this year's list. Maybe they wanted to spread things out a bit more? He certainly didn't get dumber

Yes, he did. Yes, it is. Yes, I hope so. Yes, he did?

Good point. A rookie did get put out there (Connor McDavid) and a breakout player, the smooth playmaker Charles Sarault...so I guess it was just voter fatigue from the defensive d-man award and best penalty killer.

Most media in most markets don't ask poignant questions because they are scared of not getting future answers if they ask tough questions and because most media types genuinely don't know or don't care enough about the game to ask worthwhile questions.